◄►Bookmark◄❌►▲▼Toggle AllToC▲▼Add to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply

Search TextCase SensitiveExact WordsInclude Comments

List of Bookmarks

Amid the proverbial doom and gloom pervading all things Syria, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune sometimes yield, well, good fortune.

Take what happened this past Sunday in Beijing. The China-Arab Exchange Association and the Syrian Embassy organized a Syria Day Expo crammed with hundreds of Chinese specialists in infrastructure investment. It was a sort of mini-gathering of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), billed as “The First Project Matchmaking Fair for Syria Reconstruction”.

And there will be serious follow-ups: a Syria Reconstruction Expo; the 59th Damascus International Fair next month, where around 30 Arab and foreign nations will be represented; and the China-Arab States Expo in Yinchuan, Ningxia Hui province, in September.

Qin Yong, deputy chairman of the China-Arab Exchange Association, announced that Beijing plans to invest $2 billion in an industrial park in Syria for 150 Chinese companies.

Nothing would make more sense. Before the tragic Syrian proxy war, Syrian merchants were already incredibly active in the small-goods Silk Road between Yiwu and the Levant. The Chinese don’t forget that Syria controlled overland access to both Europe and Africa in ancient Silk Road times when, after the desert crossing via Palmyra, goods reached the Mediterranean on their way to Rome. After the demise of Palmyra, a secondary road followed the Euphrates upstream and then through Aleppo and Antioch.

Beijing always plans years ahead. And the government in Damascus is implicated at the highest levels. So, it’s not an accident that Syrian Ambassador to China Imad Moustapha had to come up with the clincher: China, Russia and Iran will have priority over anyone else for all infrastructure investment and reconstruction projects when the war is over.

The New Silk Roads, or One Belt, One Road Initiative (Obor), will inevitably feature a Syrian hub – complete with the requisite legal support for Chinese companies involved in investment, construction and banking via a special commission created by the Syrian embassy, the China-Arab Exchange Association and the Beijing-based Shijing law firm.

Get me on that Shanghai-Latakia cargo

Few remember that before the war China had already invested tens of billions of US dollars in Syria’s oil and gas industry. Naturally the priority for Damascus, once the war is over, will be massive reconstruction of widely destroyed infrastructure. China could be part of that via the AIIB. Then comes investment in agriculture, industry and connectivity – transportation corridors in the Levant and connecting Syria to Iraq and Iran (other two Obor hubs).

What matters most of all is that Beijing has already taken the crucial step of being directly involved in the final settlement of the Syrian war – geopolitically and geo-economically. Beijing has had a special representative for Syria since last year – and has already been providing humanitarian aid.

Needless to add, all those elaborate plans depend on no more war. And there’s the rub.

With the demise of Daesh (ISIS), or at least its imminent loss of any significant urban center, no one knows in what manner a fragmented, phony Caliphate “Sunnistan” might be manipulated into cutting Syria from its New Silk Road future.

Qatar has already provided a game-changer; Doha has gotten closer to Tehran (common interests in South Pars/North Dome gas-field oblige), as well as Damascus – much to the despair of the House of Saud. So, unlike the recent past, Qatar is not engaged in regime change anymore. But still there are the diverging interests of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel and, of course, Washington, to accommodate.

A possible scenario out of what Putin and Trump negotiated in Hamburg – that was not relayed by either Lavrov or Tillerson – is that the ceasefire in southwestern Syria, assuming it holds, could mean US peacekeeping forces in effect sanctioning the creation of a demilitarized zone (DMZ) between the Syrian Golan and the rest of the country.

Translation: the Golan de facto annexed by Israel. And the “carrot” for Moscow would be Washington accepting Crimea de facto re-incorporated into the Russian Federation.

That may sound less far-fetched than it seems. The next few months will tell if this is indeed a plausible scenario.

The other big sticking point is Ankara against the YPG Kurds. Contrary to the ominous and quite possible Balkanization scenario, Washington and Moscow might well decide, in tandem, to let them sort things out by themselves. Then we will inevitably have the Turkish army occupying al-Bab for the foreseeable future.

The bottom line: that Saudi Arabia gets nothing. And Israel and Turkey get political/military “wins”. It’s hard to imagine how Moscow could possibly sell this arrangement to Iran as a victory. Still, Tehran may not have a free flow Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hezbollah route totally back in action, but it will maintain close relations with Damascus and be engaged in the expansion of the New Silk Roads.

The key question from now on seems to be whether Washington will follow the deep state “Syraq” policy – as in “Assad must go” mixed with support or weaponizing of non-existent “moderate rebels”; or whether Trump’s priority – to eliminate Daesh/ISIS for good – will prevail.

Beijing, anyway, has made up its mind. It will work non-stop for the Iran-Iraq-Syria triumvirate to become a key hub in Obor. Any bets against a future, booming Shanghai-Latakia container route?

I'm not sure what you mean here, but the main threat to Israel is demographic, hence their desire (Oded Yinon) to foment instability in the region and reduce relatively modern Arab states (like Iraq and Syria) to ineffective, squabbling tribes. I imagine a strong China enforcing stability for economic reasons and not giving a damn about Jewish ethnic interests (like the US lapdog) would in fact be viewed warily, at least, by Israel.

ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.

AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

The USA doesn’t need to be the hegemon. We can roll with the new silk road. Although, to be fair, I think it’s time we started pointing out that China is still a communist country, with basically the country’s entire economic output controlled by the state, which owns industries, banks, etc. In fact, I’ve been pointing this out for 30 years, ever since China was granted favored nation trading rights. I love throwing this fact in the face of American Ayn Rand libertarians, who don’t understand the rapid development that socialist policies have achieved in the last 200 years, and instead focus on the number of people who’ve been killed by statist/socialist policies. We’re at a strange point in America right now, where we seem willing to accept the gross human rights violations of communism in order to win the game. It’s all about game theory now, anyway, isn’t it?

We’re at a strange point in America right now, where we seem willing to accept the gross human rights violations of communism in order to win the game.

It's not really anything new; look who funded and supported Uncle Joey. "We" have always accepted, if not encouraged, "exceptions" to our philosophical purity for one reason or another.The communist movement was hijacked by the money bag boys based in New York and London and twisted to suit their ends just like what happened after the American revolution and many other movements and revolutions.

As far as throwing stuff in Libertarian faces, I wonder what China or the US would be like had they had a chance to develop truly free markets. Especially free from manipulation by the big banksters. The Chinese, in my experience, are pretty sharp cookies when it comes to business.

I do think Libertarians are on the right track by preaching the gospel of smaller government and decentralizing power, but the true goal would be anarchy in a more ideal world.

(I do agree that Ayn Rand's "greed is good" silliness is just plain corny.)

The rebuilding of Syria will be a huge economic boom. Whatever all the various factions have to do do to get in on it will happen because cash is King. America will have to tread carefully, everyone thinks they are just a giant Dufus over there, if they want to get back any respect they will have to play the part of peacemaker builder not Military lunatic.

{Translation: the Golan de facto annexed by Israel. And the “carrot” for Moscow would be Washington accepting Crimea de facto re-incorporated into the Russian Federation.}

I don’t understand where is the quid pro quo here.
Why would Russia care whether Washington ‘accepts’ Crimea being part of RF or not?
US sanctions mean nothing as far as RF is concerned.
EU sanctions have done some hurt, but RF has developed immunity by now.
And EU is already opposing US’s pressure to continue with the sanctions, because Russia’s counter-sanctions are causing EU considerable pain.
Whether anyone recognize it or not, Crimea _is_ part of Russia.

So where is the real carrot for Russia? I don’t see it.
(Neocon) US is going to stab Russia in the back again and again.
I doubt Russia expects anything good coming out of US.

As to the Golan: Syria is in no position to take it back by force, so they have to live with it, until geopolitical tectonic plates shift in their favour – if ever.

The rebuilding of Syria will be a huge economic boom. Whatever all the various factions have to do do to get in on it will happen because cash is King. America will have to tread carefully, everyone thinks they are just a giant Dufus over there, if they want to get back any respect they will have to play the part of peacemaker builder not Military lunatic.

The rebuilding of Syria will be a huge economic boom.

It’s only an “economic boom” if there is someone who can pay for the reconstruction.

So….. uhhh? Syria? I don’t think so. And note that this is not over yet by far.

The taxpayer? The taxpayer is underwater for about 200 trillion dollars.

Translation: the Golan de facto annexed by Israel. And the “carrot” for Moscow would be Washington accepting Crimea de facto re-incorporated into the Russian Federation.

I would bet some money on this.

Let’s watch out for de-escalation noises from the MSM and Europeans suddenly finding “historical reasons” why Crimea should belong to Russia, then “convincing” the Americans that this is good policy while territorial changes in the Middle East are deep-sixed to footnotes on page 5 and smothered in UN mumbling.

It is hard to see how genuine and non paranoid Israeli fears would be roused by the idea of China's huge secular/economic power dominating Syria.

I’m not sure what you mean here, but the main threat to Israel is demographic, hence their desire (Oded Yinon) to foment instability in the region and reduce relatively modern Arab states (like Iraq and Syria) to ineffective, squabbling tribes. I imagine a strong China enforcing stability for economic reasons and not giving a damn about Jewish ethnic interests (like the US lapdog) would in fact be viewed warily, at least, by Israel.

The EU is about a single market within Europe, and barriers to the rest of the world.

The key problem for isreal is not demographic but political, the status of the west Bank Arabs cannot remain in limbo forever. Official US policy is for a two state solution and that dooms Israel unless they get rid of them.

The only country thet Israel fears is Egypt, and it has been neutralised by US aid. Israel ( which could always count on the US anyway) effectively has no external enemies--Syria was never a threat. But no one in Israel dares mention the unsustainable position of the Palestinians in the occupied territories, or the only solution.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but the main threat to Israel is demographic, hence their desire (Oded Yinon) to foment instability in the region and reduce relatively modern Arab states (like Iraq and Syria) to ineffective, squabbling tribes. I imagine a strong China enforcing stability for economic reasons and not giving a damn about Jewish ethnic interests (like the US lapdog) would in fact be viewed warily, at least, by Israel.

The EU is about a single market within Europe, and barriers to the rest of the world.

The key problem for isreal is not demographic but political, the status of the west Bank Arabs cannot remain in limbo forever. Official US policy is for a two state solution and that dooms Israel unless they get rid of them.

The only country thet Israel fears is Egypt, and it has been neutralised by US aid. Israel ( which could always count on the US anyway) effectively has no external enemies–Syria was never a threat. But no one in Israel dares mention the unsustainable position of the Palestinians in the occupied territories, or the only solution.

I'm interested in the style of rhetoric used on UR (not uniquely UR I should probably add for accuracy). If you think about it "no one in Israel dares mention" is virtually never true about anything. Even in China it is probably not literally true but in Israel there would always be somebody scteaming the unsayable. At least that's my impression without claiming that my one visit to Israel gives me the aithority to say that. (I did hear a Bedouin mayor say publicly that he didn't recognise Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state).

As to Egypt being the only country Israel fears how foes that fit in with their emphasis on the danger from Iran getting nuclear weapons? And,, as to Egypt, what do they fear about it and why? After all they can threaten to destroy the Aswan dam as a last resort....

{Translation: the Golan de facto annexed by Israel. And the “carrot” for Moscow would be Washington accepting Crimea de facto re-incorporated into the Russian Federation.}

I don't understand where is the quid pro quo here.
Why would Russia care whether Washington 'accepts' Crimea being part of RF or not?
US sanctions mean nothing as far as RF is concerned.
EU sanctions have done some hurt, but RF has developed immunity by now.
And EU is already opposing US's pressure to continue with the sanctions, because Russia's counter-sanctions are causing EU considerable pain.
Whether anyone recognize it or not, Crimea _is_ part of Russia.

So where is the real carrot for Russia? I don't see it.
(Neocon) US is going to stab Russia in the back again and again.
I doubt Russia expects anything good coming out of US.

As to the Golan: Syria is in no position to take it back by force, so they have to live with it, until geopolitical tectonic plates shift in their favour - if ever.

In more reasonable times, I recall that the Israelis were prepared to negotiate the return of Golan to Syria.

This was before the US began their ‘destroy all of Israel’s perceived enemies’, under Project for a New American Century, and the earlier Israeli prototype.

Now, they have almost destroyed Iraq and Syria, Yemen, for some reason, the Izzies and Neocons want Iran as the next target.

I know I am stating the obvious here, it is a disgusting process.

Why the hell not unleash ‘Shock and awe’ on Riyadh, Mecca, and Medina?

The wahhabi have eliminated just about all structures of historical interest in the latter two, look at photos of recent Mecca, Islamic Disneyland.

So, if US polity is so addicted to bombing campaigns, why not Saudi Arabia?

The USA doesn't need to be the hegemon. We can roll with the new silk road. Although, to be fair, I think it's time we started pointing out that China is still a communist country, with basically the country's entire economic output controlled by the state, which owns industries, banks, etc. In fact, I've been pointing this out for 30 years, ever since China was granted favored nation trading rights. I love throwing this fact in the face of American Ayn Rand libertarians, who don't understand the rapid development that socialist policies have achieved in the last 200 years, and instead focus on the number of people who've been killed by statist/socialist policies. We're at a strange point in America right now, where we seem willing to accept the gross human rights violations of communism in order to win the game. It's all about game theory now, anyway, isn't it?

Great job as usual Pepe!

We’re at a strange point in America right now, where we seem willing to accept the gross human rights violations of communism in order to win the game.

It’s not really anything new; look who funded and supported Uncle Joey. “We” have always accepted, if not encouraged, “exceptions” to our philosophical purity for one reason or another.The communist movement was hijacked by the money bag boys based in New York and London and twisted to suit their ends just like what happened after the American revolution and many other movements and revolutions.

As far as throwing stuff in Libertarian faces, I wonder what China or the US would be like had they had a chance to develop truly free markets. Especially free from manipulation by the big banksters. The Chinese, in my experience, are pretty sharp cookies when it comes to business.

I do think Libertarians are on the right track by preaching the gospel of smaller government and decentralizing power, but the true goal would be anarchy in a more ideal world.

(I do agree that Ayn Rand’s “greed is good” silliness is just plain corny.)

Not really. Sunni and Shia (and Druze and Christian) fought ISIS shoulder to shoulder in Iraq, and are still fighting ISIS in Syria. Nasrallah recently made a speech praising their cooperation, making a special point to thank the Sunnis for their contribution, particularly Sunni scholars and mullahs who held fast against ISIS' toxic ideology (which was decisive).
The "Resistance Axis" paid no mind to the "Shia-Sunni divide" on its way to victory, and so it will be in the peace. Both sides stared into the abyss and the same enemy stared back for both.

The EU is about a single market within Europe, and barriers to the rest of the world.

The key problem for isreal is not demographic but political, the status of the west Bank Arabs cannot remain in limbo forever. Official US policy is for a two state solution and that dooms Israel unless they get rid of them.

The only country thet Israel fears is Egypt, and it has been neutralised by US aid. Israel ( which could always count on the US anyway) effectively has no external enemies--Syria was never a threat. But no one in Israel dares mention the unsustainable position of the Palestinians in the occupied territories, or the only solution.

I’m interested in the style of rhetoric used on UR (not uniquely UR I should probably add for accuracy). If you think about it “no one in Israel dares mention” is virtually never true about anything. Even in China it is probably not literally true but in Israel there would always be somebody scteaming the unsayable. At least that’s my impression without claiming that my one visit to Israel gives me the aithority to say that. (I did hear a Bedouin mayor say publicly that he didn’t recognise Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state).

As to Egypt being the only country Israel fears how foes that fit in with their emphasis on the danger from Iran getting nuclear weapons? And,, as to Egypt, what do they fear about it and why? After all they can threaten to destroy the Aswan dam as a last resort….

I think there have been several major US politicians who said that the US would destroy Iran if it was about to attack Israel,and Iran isn't going to commit suicide. A real threat to Israel is the occupied territories and the status of the Arabs, which is one not openly discussed by Israelis in and around government circles, and the US Israel lobby don't mention it either, Iran is a useful proxy for it inasmuch as the US will help with Iran, but not the unmentionable.

Israel cannot continue as it is and there is a great silence about the practical alternatives. Expulsion of the West Bank Arabs is not talked about openly by those in power because Israeli politics are conducted with an eye on keeping US support continuing indefinitely. Withdrawal from the West Bank is not advocated either, because it is unacceptable in Israel. So things will go on as they are, until the two state solution (official bipartisan US policy) becomes unavoidable.

As the 1973 offensive by Sadat to get Egypt paid attention to effectively demonstrated, Egypt is too big and too populous for a small country to be in unending conflict with it, and that is why it was removed from the equation by American aid, which is on the condition that Egypt leaves Israel alone.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but the main threat to Israel is demographic, hence their desire (Oded Yinon) to foment instability in the region and reduce relatively modern Arab states (like Iraq and Syria) to ineffective, squabbling tribes. I imagine a strong China enforcing stability for economic reasons and not giving a damn about Jewish ethnic interests (like the US lapdog) would in fact be viewed warily, at least, by Israel.

Yes, i did say “genuine and non paranoid Israeli fears” as a gesture towards what you are noting.

I'm not sure what you mean here, but the main threat to Israel is demographic, hence their desire (Oded Yinon) to foment instability in the region and reduce relatively modern Arab states (like Iraq and Syria) to ineffective, squabbling tribes. I imagine a strong China enforcing stability for economic reasons and not giving a damn about Jewish ethnic interests (like the US lapdog) would in fact be viewed warily, at least, by Israel.

You say real good point there… Haha… China don’t even know what a Jew is!

Just ask Ron Unz about the Jews of Kaifeng and the Chinese hospitality given to Jews escaping Nazi Germany. The rank and file Chinese may not know who Jews are but you can bet the leadership knows. Besides, Chinese can identify with Jews seeing that they're smart, successful and religious and two out of three ain't so bad being that the Chinese are atheist and materialistic!

I agree the war in Syrian and the “situation” in the Ukraine are inseparable in a lot of ways, but I don’t think Crimea is/will be used as some sort of geopolitical “bargaining chip” atm…

It’s true that when the relevant decision makers in Russia saw armed groups of “peaceful protesters” in the streets, and masked snipers on the rooftops, of Keiv many most likely made some sort of mental connection between what was going on in the Ukraine at the time and what was/is going on in Syria.

Be that as it may, as we all know and saw: “the people” of the Crimea “voted” to become part of the Russian Federation. What mechanism could/would be used to reverse this decision? I guess another “vote” could be a theoretical “off ramp” here; however, I don’t think a “free and fair”, international monitored, “election” would produce a result that would return the Crimea to the Ukraine anytime in the near future…

I am constantly reminded of my naiveté by the total absence of discussion of what seem to me obvious possible solutions to geopolitical problems. For example why shouldn't a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory, country if you like, with the right after 40 years to seek scceptance as part of Russia?

Another area of possible common interest is Palestine where lots of donor money and other assistance should make the creation of a handful of more or less federated city states on the West Bank where they could become mini Hong Kongs an attractive alternative to poverty with a nationalistic and belligerent flavour. Too naive even to talk about?

Ah but I should remember my conversations with the highly rational and far from naive man appointed as UN mediator in Kashmir in 1950 and how his perfectly rational plan of partition was sunk by the Indians.....

... many most likely made some sort of mental connection between what was going on in the Ukraine at the time and what was/is going on in Syria.

Well, it didn't go unnoticed in the high places where strategy is made. For the Russians' part, the Kremlin no doubt did its planning, but it didn't move into Syria until the Ukrainian conflict had been frozen solidly in place politically and militarily.

For the West's part, gobsmacked on both fronts, the Pentagon, DoS and NATO reacted with confused propaganda, and seem to have settled on that as a long term "strategy" for lack of anything useful they could actually do.
A few grand strategists called for a rethink, but in fact the situation had long since passed the available turning points. See https://www.forbes.com/sites/stratfor/2014/09/02/ukraine-iraq-and-a-black-sea-strategy/2/#49b559b63e05 for one such call.

In short, the Americans walked triumphantly into their own tarpits, while the Russians watched and took the resulting advantage.

BTW, I don’t think it’s even US “official” policy that “the Golan” is part of so-called “Israel” as of yet…

Jerusalem is not the capital of so-called “Israel”, and the Golan is not part of so-called “Israel”… At least not “officially” according to the US, the UN, or anyone besides so-called “Israel” as far as I know…

I agree the war in Syrian and the "situation" in the Ukraine are inseparable in a lot of ways, but I don't think Crimea is/will be used as some sort of geopolitical "bargaining chip" atm...

It's true that when the relevant decision makers in Russia saw armed groups of "peaceful protesters" in the streets, and masked snipers on the rooftops, of Keiv many most likely made some sort of mental connection between what was going on in the Ukraine at the time and what was/is going on in Syria.

Be that as it may, as we all know and saw: "the people" of the Crimea "voted" to become part of the Russian Federation. What mechanism could/would be used to reverse this decision? I guess another "vote" could be a theoretical "off ramp" here; however, I don't think a "free and fair", international monitored, "election" would produce a result that would return the Crimea to the Ukraine anytime in the near future...

But I guess we shall see...

I am constantly reminded of my naiveté by the total absence of discussion of what seem to me obvious possible solutions to geopolitical problems. For example why shouldn’t a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory, country if you like, with the right after 40 years to seek scceptance as part of Russia?

Another area of possible common interest is Palestine where lots of donor money and other assistance should make the creation of a handful of more or less federated city states on the West Bank where they could become mini Hong Kongs an attractive alternative to poverty with a nationalistic and belligerent flavour. Too naive even to talk about?

Ah but I should remember my conversations with the highly rational and far from naive man appointed as UN mediator in Kashmir in 1950 and how his perfectly rational plan of partition was sunk by the Indians…..

For example why shouldn’t a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory

Umm, it was called the Autonomous Republic of Crimea when Khrushchev transferred administration to the Ukrainian SSR, and it stayed that way right through Maidan.

During the dissolution of the USSR in the early '90s, Crimea twice held referendums in response to the West's insistence on it staying under the administration of the newly independent Ukraine. They knew well that the Ukraine would soon go to hell in a handbasket even then, and the results were equivalent to the 2014 referendum. The Soviets at that time had just enough wit remaining to insist that the Ukraine keep the name and political structure.
That's why its breakaway was so clean. It had all the trappings of statehood minus a central bank and an army.

I'm interested in the style of rhetoric used on UR (not uniquely UR I should probably add for accuracy). If you think about it "no one in Israel dares mention" is virtually never true about anything. Even in China it is probably not literally true but in Israel there would always be somebody scteaming the unsayable. At least that's my impression without claiming that my one visit to Israel gives me the aithority to say that. (I did hear a Bedouin mayor say publicly that he didn't recognise Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state).

As to Egypt being the only country Israel fears how foes that fit in with their emphasis on the danger from Iran getting nuclear weapons? And,, as to Egypt, what do they fear about it and why? After all they can threaten to destroy the Aswan dam as a last resort....

I think there have been several major US politicians who said that the US would destroy Iran if it was about to attack Israel,and Iran isn’t going to commit suicide. A real threat to Israel is the occupied territories and the status of the Arabs, which is one not openly discussed by Israelis in and around government circles, and the US Israel lobby don’t mention it either, Iran is a useful proxy for it inasmuch as the US will help with Iran, but not the unmentionable.

Israel cannot continue as it is and there is a great silence about the practical alternatives. Expulsion of the West Bank Arabs is not talked about openly by those in power because Israeli politics are conducted with an eye on keeping US support continuing indefinitely. Withdrawal from the West Bank is not advocated either, because it is unacceptable in Israel. So things will go on as they are, until the two state solution (official bipartisan US policy) becomes unavoidable.

As the 1973 offensive by Sadat to get Egypt paid attention to effectively demonstrated, Egypt is too big and too populous for a small country to be in unending conflict with it, and that is why it was removed from the equation by American aid, which is on the condition that Egypt leaves Israel alone.

That hangs together pretty well IIMSS. But i baulked at "until the two state solution becomes unavoidable" because I was expecting "becomes impossible" which would seem consistent with the Israeli policy of preferring the status quo to any settlement they can imagine being on offer.

If the underlying belief is strengthening of Iran, a more interesting proposal is an Iran-Iraq-Syria oil export pipeline.

That implies a wholesale change in Sunni-Shia relations.

Not really. Sunni and Shia (and Druze and Christian) fought ISIS shoulder to shoulder in Iraq, and are still fighting ISIS in Syria. Nasrallah recently made a speech praising their cooperation, making a special point to thank the Sunnis for their contribution, particularly Sunni scholars and mullahs who held fast against ISIS’ toxic ideology (which was decisive).
The “Resistance Axis” paid no mind to the “Shia-Sunni divide” on its way to victory, and so it will be in the peace. Both sides stared into the abyss and the same enemy stared back for both.

I am constantly reminded of my naiveté by the total absence of discussion of what seem to me obvious possible solutions to geopolitical problems. For example why shouldn't a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory, country if you like, with the right after 40 years to seek scceptance as part of Russia?

Another area of possible common interest is Palestine where lots of donor money and other assistance should make the creation of a handful of more or less federated city states on the West Bank where they could become mini Hong Kongs an attractive alternative to poverty with a nationalistic and belligerent flavour. Too naive even to talk about?

Ah but I should remember my conversations with the highly rational and far from naive man appointed as UN mediator in Kashmir in 1950 and how his perfectly rational plan of partition was sunk by the Indians.....

For example why shouldn’t a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory

Umm, it was called the Autonomous Republic of Crimea when Khrushchev transferred administration to the Ukrainian SSR, and it stayed that way right through Maidan.

During the dissolution of the USSR in the early ’90s, Crimea twice held referendums in response to the West’s insistence on it staying under the administration of the newly independent Ukraine. They knew well that the Ukraine would soon go to hell in a handbasket even then, and the results were equivalent to the 2014 referendum. The Soviets at that time had just enough wit remaining to insist that the Ukraine keep the name and political structure.
That’s why its breakaway was so clean. It had all the trappings of statehood minus a central bank and an army.

I agree the war in Syrian and the "situation" in the Ukraine are inseparable in a lot of ways, but I don't think Crimea is/will be used as some sort of geopolitical "bargaining chip" atm...

It's true that when the relevant decision makers in Russia saw armed groups of "peaceful protesters" in the streets, and masked snipers on the rooftops, of Keiv many most likely made some sort of mental connection between what was going on in the Ukraine at the time and what was/is going on in Syria.

Be that as it may, as we all know and saw: "the people" of the Crimea "voted" to become part of the Russian Federation. What mechanism could/would be used to reverse this decision? I guess another "vote" could be a theoretical "off ramp" here; however, I don't think a "free and fair", international monitored, "election" would produce a result that would return the Crimea to the Ukraine anytime in the near future...

But I guess we shall see...

… many most likely made some sort of mental connection between what was going on in the Ukraine at the time and what was/is going on in Syria.

Well, it didn’t go unnoticed in the high places where strategy is made. For the Russians’ part, the Kremlin no doubt did its planning, but it didn’t move into Syria until the Ukrainian conflict had been frozen solidly in place politically and militarily.

I read thst (which told me something I didn't know) in my Inbox, provided a "p", and asdumed it was on another topic I had addressed, namely whether Israel should have any rational fear of China becoming a major player in Syria!

I am not sure how far trade deals eo ipso support your point. After all President Trump doesn't seem to think they count for much when you get out of bed one morning and decide that last week's trade deal gave you today's hangover. However it occurs toe to add on the other subject that Israel is so unimportant to China as a source of harm and the Arabs so incapable of hurting China that Israel has nothing to fear. And, come to think of it the Chinese send settlers to Tibet and to Shanxi so thete could well be scope for a Sino Israeli Institute for the Problems of Primitive People.

A few years ago, they established a referential trade agreement which shows clearly that they are interested in closer economic relations despite political disagreements.

[Too Many Typos.]

I read thst (which told me something I didn’t know) in my Inbox, provided a “p”, and asdumed it was on another topic I had addressed, namely whether Israel should have any rational fear of China becoming a major player in Syria!

I am not sure how far trade deals eo ipso support your point. After all President Trump doesn’t seem to think they count for much when you get out of bed one morning and decide that last week’s trade deal gave you today’s hangover. However it occurs toe to add on the other subject that Israel is so unimportant to China as a source of harm and the Arabs so incapable of hurting China that Israel has nothing to fear. And, come to think of it the Chinese send settlers to Tibet and to Shanxi so thete could well be scope for a Sino Israeli Institute for the Problems of Primitive People.

I think there have been several major US politicians who said that the US would destroy Iran if it was about to attack Israel,and Iran isn't going to commit suicide. A real threat to Israel is the occupied territories and the status of the Arabs, which is one not openly discussed by Israelis in and around government circles, and the US Israel lobby don't mention it either, Iran is a useful proxy for it inasmuch as the US will help with Iran, but not the unmentionable.

Israel cannot continue as it is and there is a great silence about the practical alternatives. Expulsion of the West Bank Arabs is not talked about openly by those in power because Israeli politics are conducted with an eye on keeping US support continuing indefinitely. Withdrawal from the West Bank is not advocated either, because it is unacceptable in Israel. So things will go on as they are, until the two state solution (official bipartisan US policy) becomes unavoidable.

As the 1973 offensive by Sadat to get Egypt paid attention to effectively demonstrated, Egypt is too big and too populous for a small country to be in unending conflict with it, and that is why it was removed from the equation by American aid, which is on the condition that Egypt leaves Israel alone.

That hangs together pretty well IIMSS. But i baulked at “until the two state solution becomes unavoidable” because I was expecting “becomes impossible” which would seem consistent with the Israeli policy of preferring the status quo to any settlement they can imagine being on offer.

Ehud Barak Warns: Israel Faces 'Slippery Slope' Toward Apartheid
If Israel keeps controlling Palestinians, 'inevitable' result will be 'either non-Jewish or non-democratic' state, former Israeli PM tells Conflict Zone's Tim Sebastian in Deutsche Welle TV interview[...]
"If we keep controlling the whole area from the Mediterranean to the river Jordan where some 13 million people are living -- eight million Israelis, five million Palestinians ... if only one entity reigned over this whole area, named Israel," the 74-year-old former premier says, "it would become inevitably -- that's the key word, inevitably – either non-Jewish or non-democratic."

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.796949

http://mondoweiss.net/2017/06/barak-palestinian-viable/

No one in the world thinks that we are Switzerland here, but I’m telling you, with full responsibility, no one in the world understands how come the government of Israel sees in a Palestinian state which is demilitarized– almost completely not viable, surrounded by the Israeli forces– the strongest army in the world, almost a nuclear superpower, backed by America, including technologies that they didn’t even give to their own soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan– how can this non-viable state, which is surrounded, be an existential threat on Israel?… Existential threat on Israel? This sounds like either fabricated or visionary or completely crazy planning.

That hangs together pretty well IIMSS. But i baulked at "until the two state solution becomes unavoidable" because I was expecting "becomes impossible" which would seem consistent with the Israeli policy of preferring the status quo to any settlement they can imagine being on offer.

Few weeks ago

Ehud Barak Warns: Israel Faces ‘Slippery Slope’ Toward Apartheid
If Israel keeps controlling Palestinians, ‘inevitable’ result will be ‘either non-Jewish or non-democratic’ state, former Israeli PM tells Conflict Zone’s Tim Sebastian in Deutsche Welle TV interview[...]
“If we keep controlling the whole area from the Mediterranean to the river Jordan where some 13 million people are living — eight million Israelis, five million Palestinians … if only one entity reigned over this whole area, named Israel,” the 74-year-old former premier says, “it would become inevitably — that’s the key word, inevitably – either non-Jewish or non-democratic.”

No one in the world thinks that we are Switzerland here, but I’m telling you, with full responsibility, no one in the world understands how come the government of Israel sees in a Palestinian state which is demilitarized– almost completely not viable, surrounded by the Israeli forces– the strongest army in the world, almost a nuclear superpower, backed by America, including technologies that they didn’t even give to their own soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan– how can this non-viable state, which is surrounded, be an existential threat on Israel?… Existential threat on Israel? This sounds like either fabricated or visionary or completely crazy planning.

I am constantly reminded of my naiveté by the total absence of discussion of what seem to me obvious possible solutions to geopolitical problems. For example why shouldn't a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory, country if you like, with the right after 40 years to seek scceptance as part of Russia?

Another area of possible common interest is Palestine where lots of donor money and other assistance should make the creation of a handful of more or less federated city states on the West Bank where they could become mini Hong Kongs an attractive alternative to poverty with a nationalistic and belligerent flavour. Too naive even to talk about?

Ah but I should remember my conversations with the highly rational and far from naive man appointed as UN mediator in Kashmir in 1950 and how his perfectly rational plan of partition was sunk by the Indians.....

A well chosen time for a simulation of modsty by your rare brevity as you seem to be in the minority. Still I would be interested for you to disclose which of the UR commenters' pathologies is responsible for your choice of "dissembling".

I am constantly reminded of my naiveté by the total absence of discussion of what seem to me obvious possible solutions to geopolitical problems. For example why shouldn't a settlement of the Crimea issue be achieved by agreement that Crimea should be a self governing separate territory, country if you like, with the right after 40 years to seek scceptance as part of Russia?

Another area of possible common interest is Palestine where lots of donor money and other assistance should make the creation of a handful of more or less federated city states on the West Bank where they could become mini Hong Kongs an attractive alternative to poverty with a nationalistic and belligerent flavour. Too naive even to talk about?

Ah but I should remember my conversations with the highly rational and far from naive man appointed as UN mediator in Kashmir in 1950 and how his perfectly rational plan of partition was sunk by the Indians.....

Can you provide any link to the Indian obstruction in 50s to the Kashmir issue ?

Sorry I would be starting where you are unleas it is a help to toss in the nanes of Owen Dixon, Jinnah and Nehru together perhaps with Dean Acheson who had got to know Dixon during WW2 in DC and was inatrumental in having Dixon appounted UN mediator in Kashmir. My knowledge comes just from recollection of converaations with Dixon who had behaved like the careful lawyer he was and actually spent a lot of time on the ground in Kashmir to devise a partition plan. I recall that Jinnah had indicated he could and would carry the Pakistanis but that Dixon's impression was that Nehru couldn't get it through his Cabinet. You might find something about it in Philip Ayres' biography of Owen Dixon as he had full access to Dixon's papers

Can you provide any link to the Indian obstruction in 50s to the Kashmir issue ?

Sorry I would be starting where you are unleas it is a help to toss in the nanes of Owen Dixon, Jinnah and Nehru together perhaps with Dean Acheson who had got to know Dixon during WW2 in DC and was inatrumental in having Dixon appounted UN mediator in Kashmir. My knowledge comes just from recollection of converaations with Dixon who had behaved like the careful lawyer he was and actually spent a lot of time on the ground in Kashmir to devise a partition plan. I recall that Jinnah had indicated he could and would carry the Pakistanis but that Dixon’s impression was that Nehru couldn’t get it through his Cabinet. You might find something about it in Philip Ayres’ biography of Owen Dixon as he had full access to Dixon’s papers

A well chosen time for a simulation of modsty by your rare brevity as you seem to be in the minority. Still I would be interested for you to disclose which of the UR commenters’ pathologies is responsible for your choice of “dissembling”.

Few remember that before the war China had already invested tens of billions of US dollars in Syria’s oil and gas industry.

It makes sense….

‘If conflict with China is inevitable, it makes sense to have U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Iraq and maybe Iran and Syria. If China is dependent on Middle East oil, it makes sense for the U.S. to be able to control how and where it flows from the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf oil fields. It makes sense to cultivate an alliance with India, risking the accusation of nuclear hypocrisy in doing so. It makes sense to ratchet up tensions on the Korean Peninsula, by linking North Korea to Iran and Iraq, calling it ?evil,? dismissing South Korea?s ?sunshine diplomacy? efforts and encouraging Japan to take a hard line towards Pyongyang. It makes sense to get Tokyo to declare, for the first time, that the security of the Taiwan Straights is of common concern to it and Washington. It makes sense to regain a strategic toehold in the Philippines, in the name of the War on Terror, and to vilify the growing Filipino Maoist movement

Few remember that before the war China had already invested tens of billions of US dollars in Syria’s oil and gas industry.

It makes sense....

'If conflict with China is inevitable, it makes sense to have U.S. bases in Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Iraq and maybe Iran and Syria. If China is dependent on Middle East oil, it makes sense for the U.S. to be able to control how and where it flows from the Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf oil fields. It makes sense to cultivate an alliance with India, risking the accusation of nuclear hypocrisy in doing so. It makes sense to ratchet up tensions on the Korean Peninsula, by linking North Korea to Iran and Iraq, calling it ?evil,? dismissing South Korea?s ?sunshine diplomacy? efforts and encouraging Japan to take a hard line towards Pyongyang. It makes sense to get Tokyo to declare, for the first time, that the security of the Taiwan Straights is of common concern to it and Washington. It makes sense to regain a strategic toehold in the Philippines, in the name of the War on Terror, and to vilify the growing Filipino Maoist movement

http://dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Leupp20.htm

Of course it makes sense. If you want to be Global Hegemon, you must make sure nobody else can. Intent, at that level, is trivial. Capacity is all that matters.

You say real good point there... Haha... China don't even know what a Jew is!

Just ask Ron Unz about the Jews of Kaifeng and the Chinese hospitality given to Jews escaping Nazi Germany. The rank and file Chinese may not know who Jews are but you can bet the leadership knows. Besides, Chinese can identify with Jews seeing that they’re smart, successful and religious and two out of three ain’t so bad being that the Chinese are atheist and materialistic!

Use of multiple, non-Anonymous handles for commenting on this webzine is strongly discouraged, and your secret (real or fictitious) email allows you to authenticate your commenter-identity, preventing others from assuming it, accidentally or otherwise.

Therefore, keeping your Name+Email combination is important, and the 'Remember' feature saves it for you as a cookie on your device/browser.

Also, activating the 'Remember' feature enables the Agree/Disagree/LOL/Troll buttons on all comments.

Email Replies to my Comment

Body of Comment

Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter

"...They might be dumber than whites, but whites are dumber than Ashkenazi “Jews”. So, when creating policies to deal with Aboriginals, do it as though that exact policy will likewise be the one which races superior to your own will adopt towards your race. Therefore, for example, if whites d...

Keith Windschuttle, editor of Quadrant, one of the few conservative journals in Australia, has written two volumes of a work titled ‘The Fabrication of Aboriginal History’,
Those two volumes are essential reading for anyone interested in the subject. He comprehensively demolishes the myth...

“Remember thst an Americsn who scored 57 on an IQ test would be slobberingly retarded and useless.”
Retarded kids can bag groceries, fold clothes and do janitorial work. Are you sure they can’t guide you or offer food?

Care to bet the percentage of those in hard sciences who believe IQ tests measure something real vs those who take the opposite position? You write as if 1) Hawking we’re making a statement about the validity of IQ and its measurement as opposed to its relevance to his situation; and 2) that w...

Jews control most of Sweden’s media, despite their small numbers. Most notably, Bonnier.
No, Jews don't. The Bonnier family are not Jewish, though they have Jewish ancestry - about 25%. Indeed, the second biggest ownership stake is held by an actual Bishop.
They also control 25% of newspapers...

https://marchforourlives.com/faq/
This movement is for kids and by kids. March For Our Lives organizers are the kids themselves.
Sure.
If you believe this:
https://everytown.org/documents/2018/03/march-for-our-lives-toolkit.pdf
was written by "kids," I have several bridges you might like to pu...

The real war is one of information. This is where the public's hard work in creating their postings on social media reveals useful information that can be processed and launched back at them to persuade, undermine or influence etc. Note that most ideas are a composition of earlier carefully distr...

Half of Jewish students attended just eight out of 113 higher education institutions (Universities of Birmingham, Cambridge, Leeds, Manchester, Nottingham, Oxford, Kings College London, and University College London
Oxford and Cambridge are undoubtedly the best two universities. The six others l...

Anon from TN
Sometimes the more things get different, the more they remain the same.
Iraq WMD story was based on super-secret intelligence briefings that were presented by British PM at that time Tony Blair as “facts”. Similar arguments were presented to the US Congress, also citing intell...

Proyect is better considered "pseudo-left". He has also claimed the White Helmets to be heroes and that the Syrian "revolution" is a worker's revolt which will establish a progressive paradise. When challenged, he reverts to insults and exaggerated projections.
Information from official policy...

National Socialism was never as ethnically narcissistic or as mean spirited as Talmudism, Jewish supremacism or radical Zionism. Its origin and purpose was to create an economically and politically just order in Germany as far as humanly possible, and to undo the injustices inflicted upon the Ge...

Well said Emu. In my opinion anybody who wants to run down Aboriginals is sub human. What we transplanted Europeans have done to them already is bad enough.
Australia was their country, and they have, or had, their own culture and understandings and a knowledge that us materially driven wh...

Thanks for emphasizing swarm high intensity attack warfare in order to show that the NATO/FRY war is not directly applicable to any Western mass attack on Syria. The NATO war against FRY involved some 800-1000 aerial attacks per 24 hours. Any hypothetical war in Syria would involve many times t...

Iraq WMD, anyone? If that wasn’t “completely made-up stuff”
False analogies are the Achilles heel of most discussions today. Things are usually different.
I admit that I used a few weasel words 'unlikely', 'completely'...well, today wars are started based on politicians saying that s...

At the risk of losing my commenting privileges, I must say you are beginning to sound like the Hispanophile, Fred Reed...There is an Hispanic immigrant, gang problem in San Jose.
Ha, ha, ha... If I banned every commenter who said totally ridiculous things, there wouldn't be too many left on m...

According to Cofnas Mr. Unz's research is "wrong" as well:
Nathan Cofnas @nathancofnas
Replying to @westland_will @jordanbpeterson
The study you're citing (by Unz) is wrong. It overestimated the percentage of Jews among Harvard students and underestimated the percentage of Jews among hig...

So, then really the best option for the NATO rebellion against having a magna carta for the rulers of the world, is probably to sneak a secret thermonuke into Moscow and detonate.. Financing ISIS is the reveal for NATO, you just can't survive as a democratic social construct once everyone knows. ...

This children's protest was a new low in political discourse. The schools are funded by everybody and cannot serve to push one particular controversial political viewpoint. And the children are there to learn, not posture. There is a reason why young people can't drive, drink, vote, or marry.

Have you the deniers considered a possibility that Nazis colluded with Jews to perpetrate the hoax of extermination? Jews asked Nazis to help them create the story that they were exterminated because the story was necessary to further Jewish goals of taking over the world. And Nazis obliged. T...

Good mourning children and welcome to the coalition of the fringes. Today we will discuss the problem of whiteness.
By the way, kids? When the product of our education and psychiatry and the M&Ms of the depressed fail, may the victims Rest In Pieces, but don't blame US.